The dubious value of cerebrospinal fluid adenosine deaminase measurement for the diagnosis of tuberculous meningitis

BMC Infectious Diseases

Research Article

Jaya George¹  Pieter Ekermans²  Adriano Dusé³ 

[1] Department of Chemical Pathology, University of Witwatersrand and National Health Laboratory Service, Johannesburg, South Africa;Department of Chemical Pathology, University of Witwatersrand and National Health Laboratory Service, Johannesburg, South Africa;Department of Chemical Pathology and Department of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, School of Pathology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Witwatersrand and National Health Laboratory Service, 7 York Road, Johannesburg, South Africa;Department of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, University of Witwatersrand and National Health Laboratory Service, Johannesburg, South Africa;

关键词: Tuberculosis;    Meningitis;    Adenosine deaminase;    Giusti;    Pre-analytical;    Youden;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12879-017-2221-3

 received in 2016-06-10, accepted in 2017-01-25,  发布年份 2017

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundThe diagnosis of tuberculous meningitis (TBM) can be extremely difficult in the absence of culture confirmation. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) adenosine deaminase (ADA) can potentially assist in this regard, although its current value remains unclear. The literature on the usefulness of CSF ADA in TBM diagnosis is inconsistent, especially from an analytical point of view.MethodsA retrospective analysis of clinical and laboratory data relating to all CSF ADA requests during 2009 and 2010 in a South African quaternary healthcare setting was performed. A CSF ADA cut-off for TBM diagnosis was calculated using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. The performance of CSF ADA in different infective and non-infective categories was assessed.ResultsIn total, 3548 CSF ADA requests were considered over the 2-year period. Of these, 1490 were for patients for whom both a CSF ADA and a mycobacterial culture were requested. The optimal cut-off was calculated at 2.0 U/L (AUC = 0.86; 95% CI = 0.82 – 0.89; p-value < 0.01; sensitivity of 85.9% (95% CI of 77.0 – 92.3) and specificity of 77.7% (95% CI of 75.4 – 79.8%); positive likelihood ratio = 3.85 and negative likelihood ratio = 0.18). At this cut-off 13 TBM cases were missed.ConclusionAn optimal cut-off for routine use could not be established as too many TBM cases were missed. Specimen integrity, lack of ADA assay standardisation and overlap in performance of the assay in different diagnostic categories affect interpretation.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© The Author(s). 2017